- sLrJ> 






vv 



J ^ 



vv 



V ** ^ %■» 






n$ 





* V-— * a<>* V^V 1 

»fev* .J 

c° - c -°" 










*°^ -J 







"W 



"oV 






:• J- % 










o. *<7Vi* 












'.*• ,0' 






ko 4 * 



«5°* 













'XT 4 ' A O .*?.»* A 6* ^*.*'V..» 









cv * 





**Q* 






THE STRUCTURE 



OF AN 



EFFECTIVE PUBLIC SPEECH 



BY 

HARRY B. BRADBURY 



T. MOREY & SON 

GREENFIELD, MASS. 

1915 






Copyrighted, 1915, by 
HARRY B. BRADBURY 



MAR 27 1915 



<S)CLA398099 



PREFACE 

The short addresses in this small 
volume originally were delivered by the 
author as one of the members of a class in 
public speaking at the West Side Y. M. 
C. A., in New York City. Mr. Walter 
H. Robinson, who conducted the class, 
requested that the addresses be put in 
written form. This was done, with some 
amplifications, and the addresses were 
then read before the same class. Some of 
the members were kind enough to sug- 
gest that the addresses should be pre- 
served in printed form, as they believed 
they had derived valuable assistance 
from them. In deference to this sugges- 
tion the author has had them printed 
privately, without making any attempt 
to secure a publisher for the purpose of 
having the work distributed generally. 

The addresses themselves are the 
result of many years of close observation 



4 Preface 

of public speakers. To the knowledge 
thus gained has been added the fruits of 
a careful study of the works of those who 
have written on the subject of public 
speaking, from the time of Cicero to our 
own era. 

As for myself, the pleasure, and I 
believe, profit, I have derived from the 
preparation and delivery of the addresses 
is sufficient reward. Therefore I dedicate 
this book to those friends w r ho are respon- 
sible, in the way I have indicated, for the 
publication of the addresses. 

Harry B. Bradbury 
141 Broadway 
New York, February, 1915 





CONTENTS 


CHAPTER PAGE 


I. 


Preliminary .... 7 


II. 


Divisions of an Oration 12 


III. 


Introduction, or Exordium 16 


IV. 


Statement of Facts, or 




Narration 31 


V. 


Proposition 55 


VI. 


Argument and Proof . 64 


VII. 


Refutation .... 72 


VIII. 


Conclusion, or Peroration 79 


IX. 


Addendum 84 



THE STRUCTURE OF AN 
EFFECTIVE PUBLIC SPEECH 



I 



PRELIMINARY 

If the marble, granite, steel, wood and 
decorative materials out of which the 
Capitol, at Washington, w r as constructed, 
should be thrown together in a more 
or less irregular pile, it would be junk, 
merely. Many public speeches, although 
they may contain golden thoughts and 
brilliant verbal embellishments, must be 
classed as junk, because of the lack of 
proper arrangement of the materials. 
Out of the same thoughts, words and 
sentences might be constructed excellent 
speeches, by the exercise of intelligent 
attention to the plans upon which they 
were put together. This is a mere truism, 
which is proved by the experience and 
practice of every great public speaker 



8 The Structure of an 

from Demosthenes to Lincoln, and by 
the teaching of many of them. Yet a 
very large majority of men who make 
public speeches, so far at least as my own 
observation goes, seem to be unaware of 
this truism. At any rate they ignore it. 
They either think they may neglect with 
impunity all rules as to form, or they are 
unfamiliar with them, or they do not 
know how to apply them. The result 
is too often a confusing conglomeration 
of ideas and sentences which, metaphoric- 
ally speaking, resembles a cut-up picture 
puzzle in its disarranged condition. Re- 
arrange the ideas in a logical sequence 
and the result is a picture which is under- 
standable and attractive. This does not 
involve the invariable application of set 
rules or stiff formulas on all occasions. 
Quite the contrary. It requires merely 
the use of certain principles of psychology 
and logic, which are so general and broad 
in their scope as to make their applica- 
tion a simple matter. 

Do not imagine an endeavor will be 



Effective Public Speech 9 

made to prove that a simpleton can 
either compose or deliver a good public 
speech by the adoption of any suggestions 
which may be made here. It requires a 
man of both character, in its best sense, 
plus ability, to compose and deliver a 
public address which will have any lasting 
effect. Everything which may be said 
here must be qualified by the last state- 
ment. So let there be no misunderstand- 
ing on that point. 

But men of character, ability and 
experience make this mistake, not infre- 
quently. Younger men, of inexperience, 
make it almost invariably. That is, 
however much thought they may give to 
the different parts and the purely literary 
embellishments of their addresses they 
give little attention, as the result seems to 
indicate, to the fitting together of the 
different parts of their discourses, so as to 
secure and keep the attention of their 
auditors, in the process of convincing 
them of the truth of the speaker's propo- 
sitions and in persuading them to act as 



10 The Structure of an 

the speaker desires. The whole object 
of a public speaker is comprehended in 
the last sentence — to secure and hold the 
attention of his audience and then to 
convince and persuade them after he has 
secured and held their attention. 

The general principles which must be 
practiced to accomplish this end appear 
indubitably to have been understood by 
every orator of extraordinary ability 
from Demosthenes to our own time. But 
if they have ever been clearly and con- 
cisely stated, as I understand them, in a 
modern work I have been unfortunate 
enough never to have discovered the 
book in which this was done. 

I have endeavored, therefore, to reduce 
to modern thought and language the 
principles which have been applied from 
time immemorial to a subject which is 
becoming of greater importance every 
day — that of conveying ideas clearly, 
forcibly, convincingly and persuasively 
to a considerable number of persons at 
the same time. 



Effective Public Speech 1 1 

In doing this I have taken up briefly 
the consideration of the division of a 
speech generally. This will be found in 
the next succeeding chapter. In those 
which follow^ each division is discussed 
separately, and its relation to the others 
explained. In a still later chapter will be 
found a discussion of some topics relating 
to the subject which cannot be considered 
profitably in connection with any one 
particular subdivision. 



12 The Structure of an 



II 



THE DIVISIONS OF AN ORATION "^ 

According to classical authority a 
speech should be divided as follows : 

1. Introduction, or exordium. 

2. Statement of facts, or narrative. 

3. Proposition. 

4. Argument and proof. 

5. Refutation. 

6. Conclusion, or peroration. 
Certainly there is nothing novel or 

startling about the foregoing division. 
It is one that has been familiar for up- 
wards of two thousand years, at least. 
True, other divisions and sometimes more 
numerous subdivisions have been made. 
Great orators have sometimes made more 
or less extensive variations in this ar- 
rangement. But the great majority of ef- 
ective orations, made by speakers of more 
than ordinary ability, may be thus subdi- 
vided, without doing them great violence. 



Effective Public Speech 13 

After a speaker has acquired the ability to 
model his address on this plan then he 
may take the liberty of departing from 
it, to a limited extent, to meet the 
exigencies of particular occasions. Nat- 
urally this plan is applicable to what 
usually are termed set speeches. A 
running debate does not always permit 
of the use of this formality. But even 
in such a debate many of the principles 
discussed here may be applied with 
profit. 

It seems almost unnecessary to say 
that in a completed speech, as delivered, 
most of the lines of demarcation between 
the different divisions should be entirely 
obliterated, so far as the audience is 
concerned. One part should blend into 
the next, as one dissolving stereopticon 
view disappears and another comes in its 
place, but so smoothly and naturally that 
the spectators are unaware of the precise 
moment when one entirely disappears and 
the other appears. 

Such a division, logically and skilfully 



14 The Structure of an 

made, is not only of great assistance in 
retaining the attention of the audience, 
but it is also a wonderful aid to the mem- 
ory of the speaker. No doubt every 
speaker who occupies a public platform 
and gives utterance to addresses which 
are worthy of attention, finds difficulty 
in remembering to say all the things 
which he intended, or desired, to say, and 
in the order in which he intended to utter 
them. This difficulty can never be re- 
moved entirely from extempore speech. 
The word extempore is used, of course, as 
indicating merely that the address is not 
read from a manuscript. By carefully 
subdividing the speech, however, each 
part is itself suggestive of the material 
which will be found therein. As the 
various parts follow in a logical and 
invariable sequence, the speaker takes up 
each one in its turn, without the necessity 
of spending an inordinate amount of time 
and effort in memorizing the arrangement 
of his address. Even though the speech 
is committed to memory, word for word, 



Effective Public Speech 15 

this arrangement will be of great assist- 
ance. But the advisability of learning a 
speech so as to be able to repeat it by 
rote, is very doubtful. It is possible that 
on rare occasions such a practice may be 
followed with advantage. But the weight 
of opinion is against making the practice 
invariable. 



16 The Structure of an 

III 

INTRODUCTION, OR EXORDIUM 

The first few sentences which a speaker 
utters before an audience, receive more 
universal and closer attention than any- 
thing which he may thereafter say on 
that particular occasion, no matter how 
successful his oration may be. This is a 
psychological fact which is easy to ex- 
plain. Curiosity is one of the pre- 
dominant characteristics of practically 
everybody. Stop on lower Broadway, 
during the crowded noon hour, and gaze 
persistently toward the sky. See how 
soon a crowd will gather, gazing skyward, 
which, shortly, will gain such proportions 
that it will be necessary to call the police 
to disperse it. Each individual is an- 
imated by curiosity to see what you see. 
So when a new speaker is introduced and 
begins to talk, the dullest and least 
attentive person in the audience listens, 



Effective Public Speech 17 

out of sheer curiosity, to hear what this 
new speaker has to offer. This, then, is 
the very best opportunity the man on 
the platform will have to chain the 
attention of his audience to the subject 
which he has in mind. How idiotic to 
waste such a golden opportunity. What 
unadulterated folly to throw away this 
wonderful chance by actually directing 
the attention of the audience to some 
topic away from the main one which the 
speaker wishes to press home and as to 
which he desires to have the audience 
accept and act upon his recommendation. 
How unwise, then, to start a serious 
subject with a funny story. Just to the 
extent that the story has succeeded, 
exactly to that extent has the attention of 
the audience been distracted from the 
serious matter in hand, and it has been 
made that much harder to again focus 
their attention on this matter. They will 
wait for further funny stories and unless 
they are forthcoming there is a mental 
resentment, which requires Herculean 



18 The Structure of an 

efforts and marked ability to overcome, to 
the extent of again directing intelligent 
attention to the serious questions under 
discussion. It is barely possible that the 
point of a funny story may contain the 
very essence of the serious argument and 
thus form a good introduction. But this 
rarely happens and the practice is dan- 
gerous. 

Then if the funny introductory effort 
fails! This is a calamity greater than 
any public speaker can possibly under- 
stand. The golden opportunity of taking 
advantage of that fresh bloom of keen 
attention is withered and dead. More 
than that, the speaker must now over- 
come a feeling of resentment and disgust, 
before he can secure attention for the 
serious portions of his subject. 

Wit and humor have their places on the 
public platform, even in serious speeches, 
but they must be used sparingly, and 
never in the form of a digressive funny 
story as part of the introductory sen- 
tences. The sole use of such anecdotes is 



Effective Public Speech 10 

to illustrate and make more forceful a 
serious argument. Lincoln was the real 
master of this use of humorous stories. 
As when he was opposed in the adoption 
of some measure, for the reason, as his 
opponents urged, that it should not be 
adopted until they had had more expe- 
rience in the matter, Lincoln retorted 
that the argument reminded him of Pat, 
who declared: "Sure, thim boots are so 
schmall I'll not be able to git thim on me 
feet 'till after I wear thim a while/ 4 
But this was not part of Lincoln's intro- 
ductory remarks. Moreover, Lincoln 
never used humorous stories in his real 
masterpieces. How out of place such a 
story would have been in the Gettysburg 
Speech, or in the Second Inaugural 
Address. Yet these two speeches are not 
only Lincoln's masterpieces, but they are 
among the masterpieces of the English 
language. Webster never, on any occa- 
sion whatsoever, used humorous stories; 
yet his orations are masterpieces for all 
time to come. 



20 The Structure of an 

Notwithstanding it is spoken first, the 
introduction should be written last, at 
the time the speech is prepared. This is 
so necessarily, because the exordium 
should contain the very soul of the sub- 
ject. Cicero said that it should contain 
the very "bowels" of the oration, and 
Quintillian agreed with him. No matter 
which figure is used, we know what is 
meant. We want something that will 
make the greatest impression on the 
minds of the audience at the time when 
they are most attentive and therefore 
most impressionable. These first sen- 
tences must be a table of contents, or an 
index, in oratorical form, to the subject 
which is to be discussed. It should be 
made attractive, if possible, but it must 
be comprehensive, concise and under- 
standable. Long and involved sentences 
must be absolutely eliminated. Every- 
thing obscure must be clarified. The 
language must be simple and direct. 
This is no time to indulge in flourishes of 
rhetoric or figures of speech, however 



Effective Public Speech 21 

much it may be deemed advisable to 
introduce such features later in the 
speech. 

If the introduction is correctly worded 
and is used as herein suggested, the 
speaker has planted the germ of whatever 
success he may attain on that particular 
occasion, in the most favorable spot for 
its growth. The audience sees, in per- 
spective, and in its most general features, 
the subject which is to be expounded. 
They wait with interest for the develop- 
ments which are to follow, no matter 
whether they are hostile or friendly. If 
the hostility is of such a violent character 
as to refuse a courteous hearing at all, 
even at this early stage of the speech, no 
rules can help the speaker. If he is a 
genius, he may finally prevail, as did 
Henry Ward Beecher, in his Liverpool 
address. But I make no pretence of 
being able to point to rules which will 
overcome the difficulty under such ex- 
traordinary circumstances. Sometimes it 
is advisable to propitiate a less violently 



%% The Structure of an 

hostile audience. Just how this can be 
done, on each occasion, must be left to 
the good sense of the speaker himself. 
The circumstances in each case are so 
varied, that special rules would be 
merely confusing. There is one thing to 
avoid, however. Fulsome flattery never 
accomplishes this object. 

There are two foolish practices which 
are so common as to be utterly tiresome. 
That is, first, the making of excuses, and 
second, the flippant remark that the 
speaker knows nothing about the subject 
of his address, which he supposes is the 
reason why he was called upon to speak 
on that topic. If a speaker really does 
not know anything about the subject 
under discussion, he shows his very great 
lack of good sense in permitting himself 
to be induced, under any circumstances 
whatsoever, to discuss it before an 
audience. He is sure to make himself 
ridiculous sooner or later, if he attempts 
to do it. It is entirely unnecessary for 
him to advise the audience that he has 



Effective Public Speech 23 

no knowledge of the subject, because the 
audience will discover it soon enough, and 
why rub it in? If he actually has knowl- 
edge of the subject, but thinks it is witty 
to make the remark which is heard so 
often, he makes a more serious error than 
he probably realizes. The very minute 
he tells his audience that he does not 
know anything about the subject under 
discussion, a very large majority of them 
will take him at his word, and thereafter 
pay little or no attention to anything 
which he may have to say. They resent 
being talked to by a man who, by his own 
admission, does not know what he is 
talking about. They refuse to be per- 
suaded by anything which he may say on 
the subject, because they feel that the 
speaker is not an authority. On the 
other hand, if the speaker is silent as to 
his own knowledge of the subject, the 
audience will take it for granted that he 
is familiar with it, otherwise he would 
not be requested to address them. In this 
frame of mind they will be ready to 



24 The Structure of an 

accept many of his statements as being 
authoritative, whereas, if he flippantly 
tells them he does not know anything 
about the subject, they will not follow 
him at all, and his efforts are almost 
always doomed to failure. 

The foolish practice of making excuses 
on one subject and another, at the 
beginning of an address, is very common, 
especially among inexperienced speakers, 
The occasions are so very rare in which it 
is advisable, or necessary, to make any 
excuse whatsoever, that the only safe 
rule to follow is never to make excuses. 
They weaken the speaker in the minds of 
the audience, almost invariably. When 
a man rises before an audience and tells 
them that since the chairman of the 
meeting asked him to make the address 
he has been very busy, or has been on the 
road, or has been ill, or for any other of a 
thousand reasons he has been unable to 
give the attention to the subject which he 
would like to have given, and which it 
deserves, the impression is made on the 



Effective Public Speech 25 

mind of each auditor before him, that 
what he has to say is not well considered 
or authoritative. The speaker therefore 
handicaps himself. He may perhaps 
succeed in spite of his handicap, but the 
handicap is there nevertheless, and it 
may be just sufficient to turn the scales 
and make the speech a failure instead of a 
success. The best way is never to go on 
the platform unless you are reasonably 
well prepared, and then make no ex- 
cuses, but do the best you can. You are 
only making trouble for yourself by 
offering excuses and you do not smooth 
your own way by this practice, however 
much your inclination may lead you in 
that direction. 

Webster's introduction in his great 
argument, before the United States 
Supreme Court, in the Dartmouth Col- 
lege Case, was a model of conciseness and 
brevity. It also contained the very soul 
of his contention. In fact it was the whole 
point of the case around which all the 
arguments revolved. Moreover it con- 



26 The Structure of an 

tained the essential germ of one of the 
most important constitutional decisions 
in relation to corporations that has ever 
been made in this country. Webster's 
first words were: 

"The general question is, whether the 
acts of the 27th of June, and the 18th and 
26th of December, 1816, are valid and 
binding on the rights of the plaintiffs, 
without their acceptance or assent ." 

He proceeded then immediately to 
show that a corporate charter had been 
granted to Dartmouth College, giving it 
certain rights in relation to internal 
management, and that these rights had 
been taken away by the subsequent 
legislation, which was attacked as un- 
constitutional, because the College had not 
assented to have its charter thus changed. 
The Court followed Webster's reasoning 
and adopted the important principle that 
a corporate charter is a contract which is 
held inviolate under the clause in the 
Federal Constitution prohibiting a state 



Effective Public Speech 27 

from passing an act violating the obliga- 
tion of a contract. 

The very soul of Lincoln's Gettysburg 
address was certainly contained in the 
first two sentences: 

"Fourscore and seven years ago our 
fathers brought forth on this Continent 
a new nation, conceived in liberty and 
dedicated to the proposition that all 
men are created equal. Now we are 
engaged in a great civil war, testing 
whether that nation, or any nation, so 
conceived and so dedicated, can long 
endure." 

This surely was a fitting introduction 
to an address ending with that splendid 
peroration: "that government of the 
people, by the people, and for the people, 
shall not perish from the earth." 

Thomas B. Reed, in closing the debate 
on the Wilson-Tariff Bill, admirably 
stated the point of his entire argument in 
the three sentences with which he opened 
his address. He said: 



28 The Structure of an 

"In this debate, which has extended 
over many weeks, one remarkable re- 
sult has already been reached, a result of 
the deepest importance to this country. 
That result is, that the bill before us is 
odious to both sides of the House. It 
meets with favor nowhere, and commands 
the respect of neither party. On this 
side we believe that while it pretends to be 
for protection it does not afford it, and 
on the other side they believe that while 
it looks toward free trade it does not 
accomplish it." 



The eloquent address of Henry W. 
Grady in New York, in 1886, on "The 
New South," which brought him into 
immediate fame, contained, in the first 
two sentences, the very soul of his 
address. Mr. Grady's opening remarks 
were as follows: 

"There was a South of slavery and 
secession — that South is dead. There is 
a South of union and freedom — that 
South, thank God, is living, breathing, i 
growing every hour." 



Effective Public Speech 29 

St. Paul's address on Mars Hill con- 
tains a more ancient example of the 
same practice. Paul's opening words 
were: 

"Ye men of Athens, I perceive that in 
all things ye are too superstitious. For 
as I passed by, and beheld your devo- 
tions, I found an altar with this inscrip- 
tion 'TO THE UNKNOWN GOD.' 
Whom therefore ye ignorantly worship, 
Him I declare unto you." — Acts, XVII, 

The bowels of Patrick Henry's speech 
before the House of Burgesses was con- 
tained in the third or fourth sentence of 
his introduction: 

"The question before the House is one 
of awful moment to this country. For 
my own part, I consider it as nothing less 
than a question of freedom or slavery." 

This was an apt introduction to that 
burning peroration : 

"I know not what course others may 



30 The Structure of an 

take; but as for me, give me liberty, or 
give me death!" 

For a considerable time Henry Ward 
Beecher was not permitted to speak, so 
turbulent and hostile were the audience, 
at Liverpool. But when he could make 
himself heard his first words were : 

"For more than twenty-five years I 
have been made perfectly familiar with 
popular assemblies in all parts of my 
country except the extreme south. There 
has not, for the whole of that time, been a 
single day in my life when it would have 
been safe for me to go south of Mason and 
Dixon's Line, in my own country, and 
all for one reason — my solemn, earnest, 
persistent testimony against that which 
I consider to be the most atrocious thing 
under the Sun; the system of American 
slavery in a great free Republic." 

These sentences not only contained the 
bowels of Beecher's Address, but they 
were courageous words, in the face of so 
violently hostile an audience as the one 
which he faced, and they did much to 
win for him a hearing. 



Effective Public Speech 31 



IV 



STATEMENT OF FACTS OR NARRATION 

The narration, or statement of facts, 
should be an immediate expansion of the 
principal idea as expressed in the intro- 
duction. Its purpose is to give to the 
audience a clear understanding of the 
basic facts on which the argument is to be 
constructed. Here again great clarity 
should prevail. Unless the audience 
clearly understand the facts forming the 
basis of the speaker's contention they 
may miss the point of the argument 
entirely, a little later on. Of course, this 
statement must be as concise as com- 
prehensiveness and clearness will permit. 
If it is too long and an undue attention is 
paid to details the attention of the 
audience will be lost. The result of this 
will be that they will not thoroughly 
understand the matter and when the 
speaker comes to the point of stating his 



32 The Structure of an 

proposition, immediately after the narra- 
tion, the audience will not be in a mental 
condition to give the proper attention to 
it, and the address becomes more or less 
obscure. The cumulative effect of losing 
the attention of an audience at a critical 
point in a speech, not infrequently spells 
complete failure. 

The narration should be made as 
interesting as possible. Even a dry 
subject may be made interesting, almost 
invariably, by careful preparation. It 
should follow the introduction naturally 
and logically. Then if the introduction 
has been of such a character as to focus 
attention on the subject in hand, and the 
narration has made the principal facts 
clear and easily understandable, the 
audience is in a proper mental condition 
to grasp the principal proposition, which 
should immediately follow the statement. 

There is necessarily a somewhat clear 
line of demarcation at this point. But 
the proposition follows so logically and 
naturally after the narration that those 



Effective Public Speech 33 

in the average audience do not think of 
the division of the speech at all. 

In fact the narration should be so 
arranged that a climax is reached just 
before the proposition is propounded. 
If the facts narrated by the speaker are 
such that an ordinary audience of reason- 
able and fair-minded human beings 
would say that such a condition ought 
not to be permitted to exist, there arises 
in the minds of the audience, as they 
listen to the narration, individually, and 
it might almost be said collectively, the 
question: Well, what do you purpose? 
In fact the audience is keen for your 
remedy. This is the psychological mo- 
ment when the proposition should be 
presented. This is precisely the manner 
in which Webster and Macaulay handled 
their subjects in the two examples which 
are given below. A careful reading of 
these extracts shows indubitably that 
when the proposition came in each of 
these orations the listeners were waiting 
almost impatiently to hear what the 



34 The Structure of an 

proposal was which the speaker had to 
make. Probably the audience, which 
consisted of the United States Supreme 
Court in one case and the House of Com- 
mons in the other, did not note the 
division of the speech at this point at 
all. 

In Webster's Dartmouth College speech 
the proposition is in the form of a divi- 
sion and in Macaulay's address on Educa- 
tion it is a syllogism. 

The division in Webster's great address 
is a good example of that kind of a propo- 
sition. The syllogism in Macaulay's 
speech is also an excellent specimen of a 
proposition of that character. 

For the purpose of illustrating this 
point the introduction, narration and 
proposition from this great forensic of 
Webster's, before the United States 
Supreme Court, and from Macaulay's 
Parliamentary Address on Education 
are printed in full below. In Webster's 
speech the first paragraph in italics is the 
introduction and the last paragraph in 



Effective Public Speech 35 

the extract given, also in italics, is the 
proposition. 

" The general question is, whether the 
acts of the 27th of June, and of the 18th and 
26th of December, 1816, are valid and 
binding on the rights of the plaintiffs, 
WITHOUT THEIR ACCEPTANCE 
OR ASSENT. 

"The charter of 1769 created and 
established a corporation, to consist of 
twelve persons, and no more; to be called 
the 'Trustees of Dartmouth College.' 
The preamble to the charter recites, that 
it is granted on the application and re- 
quest of the Rev. Eleazer Wheelock: 
That Doctor Wheelock, about the year 
1754, established a charity school, at 
his own expense, and on his own estate 
and plantation: That for several years, 
through the assistance of well-disposed 
persons in America, granted at his 
solicitation, he had clothed, maintained, 
and educated a number of native Indians, 
and employed them afterwards as mis- 
sionaries and schoolmasters among the 
savage tribes : That, his design promising 
to be useful, he had constituted the 
Rev. Mr. Whitaker to be his attorney, 



36 The Structure of an 

with power to solicit contributions, in 
England, for the further extension and 
carrying on of his undertaking; and that 
he had requested the Earl of Dartmouth, 
Baron Smith, Mr. Thornton, and other 
gentlemen, to receive such sums as might 
be contributed, in England, towards 
supporting his school, and to be trustees 
thereof, for his charity; which these 
persons had agreed to do : And thereupon 
Doctor Wheelock had executed to them a 
deed of trust, in pursuance to such agree- 
ment between him and them, and, for 
divers good reasons, had referred it to 
these persons to determine the place in 
which the school should be finally estab- 
lished: And, to enable them to form a 
proper decision on this subject, had laid 
before them the several offers which had 
been made to him by the several govern- 
ments in America, in order to induce him 
to settle and establish his school within 
the limits of such governments for their 
own emolument, and the increase of 
learning in their respective places, as well 
as for the furtherance of his general 
original design: And inasmuch as a 
number of the proprietors of lands in 
New Hampshire, animated by the exam- 
ple of the governor himself and others, 



Effective Public Speech 37 

and in consideration that, without any 
impediment to its original design, the 
school might be enlarged and improved, 
to promote learning among the English, 
and to supply ministers to the people of 
that province, had promised large tracts 
of land, provided the school should be 
established in that province, the persons 
before mentioned, having weighed the 
reasons in favor of the several places 
proposed, had given the preference to this 
province, and these offers: That Doctor 
Wheelock therefore represented the neces- 
sity of a legal incorporation, and proposed 
that certain gentlemen in America, whom 
he had already named and appointed in 
his will to be trustees of his charity after 
his decease, should compose the corpora- 
tion. Upon this recital, and in considera- 
tion of the laudable original design of 
Doctor Wheelock, and willing that the 
best means of education be established in 
New Hampshire, for the benefit of the 
province, the king granted the charter, by 
the advice of his provincial council. 

"The substance of the facts thus re- 
cited is, that Doctor Wheelock had 
founded a charity, on funds owned and 
procured by himself; that he was at that 
time the sole dispenser and sole adminis- 



38 The Structure of an 

trator, as well as the legal owner, of these 
funds; that he had made his will, devising 
this property in trust, to continue the 
existence and uses of the school, and 
appointed trustees; that, in this state of 
things, he had been invited to fix his 
school permanently in New Hampshire, 
and to extend the design of it to the 
education of the youth of that province; 
that before he removed his school, or 
accepted this invitation, which his friends 
in England had advised him to accept, 
he applied for a charter, to be granted, not 
to whomsoever the king or government of 
the province should please, but to such 
persons as he named and appointed, 
namely, the persons whom he had already 
appointed to be the future trustees of his 
charity by his will. 

"The charter, or letters patent, then 
proceed to create such a corporation, and 
to appoint twelve persons to constitute 
it, by the name of the 'Trustees of 
Dartmouth College;' to have perpetual 
existence, as such corporation, and with 
power to hold and dispose of lands and 
goods, for the use of the college, with all 
the ordinary powers of corporations. 
They are in their discretion to apply the 
funds and property of the college to the 



Effective Public Speech 39 

support of the president, tutors, ministers, 
and other officers of the college, and such 
missionaries and schoolmasters as they 
may see fit to employ among the Indians. 
There are to be twelve trustees forever, 
and no more; and they are to have the 
right of filling vacancies occurring in 
their own body. The Rev. Mr. Wheelock 
is declared to Jbe the founder of the 
college, and is, by the charter, appointed 
first president, with power to appoint a 
successor by his last will. All proper 
powers of government, superintendence, 
and visitation are vested in the trustees. 
They are to appoint and remove all 
officers at their discretion; to fix their 
salaries, and assign their duties; and to 
make all ordinances, orders, and laws for 
the government of the students. And 
to the end that the persons who had acted 
as depositaries of the contributions in 
England, and who had also been con- 
tributors themselves, might be satisfied 
of the good use of their contributions, the 
president was annually, or when re- 
quired, to transmit to them an account 
of the progress of the institution and the 
disbursements of its funds, so long as 
they should continue to act in that 
trust. These letters patent are to be 



40 The Structure of an 

good and effectual, in law, against the 
king, his heirs and successors forever, with- 
out further grant or confirmation; and the 
trustees are to hold all and singular these 
privileges, advantages, liberties, and im- 
munities to them and to their successors 
forever. 

"No funds are given to the college by 
this charter. A corporate existence and 
capacity are given to the trustees, with 
the privileges and immunities which have 
been mentioned, to enable the founder 
and his associates the better to manage 
the funds which they themselves had 
contributed, and such others as they 
might afterwards obtain. 

"After the institution thus created and 
constituted had existed, uninterruptedly 
and usefully, nearly fifty years, the 
legislature of New Hampshire passed the 
acts in question. 

"The first act makes the twelve 
trustees under the charter, and nine 
other individuals, to be appointed by the 
governor and council, a corporation, by 
a new name; and to this new corporation 
transfers all the property, rights, powers, 
liberties, and privileges of the old corpora- 
tion; with further power to establish new 
colleges and an institute, and to apply 



Effective Public Speech 41 

all or any part of the funds to these pur- 
poses; subject to the power and control 
of a board of twenty-five overseers, to be 
appointed by the governor and council. 

"The second act makes further provi- 
sions for executing the objects of the first, 
and the last act authorizes the defendant, 
the treasurer of the plaintiffs, to retain 
and hold their property, against their 
will. 

"If these acts are valid, the old corpo- 
ration is abolished, and a new one created. 
The first act does, in fact, if it can have 
any effect, create a new corporation, and 
transfer to it all the property and fran- 
chises of the old. The two corporations 
are not the same, in anything which 
essentially belongs to the existence of a 
corporation. They have different names, 
and different powers, rights and duties. 
Their organization is wholly different. 
The powers of the corporation are not 
vested in the same, or similar hands. 
In one, the trustees are twelve, and no 
more. In the other, they are twenty-one. 
In one, the power is in a single board. 
In the other, it is divided between two 
boards. Although the act professes to 
include the old trustees in the new corpo- 
ration, yet that was without their assent, 



42 The Structure of an 

and against their remonstrance; and no 
person can be compelled to be a member 
of such a corporation against his will. 
It was neither expected nor intended 
that they should be members of the new 
corporation. The act itself treats the 
old corporation as at an end, and going 
on the ground that all its functions have 
ceased, it provides for the first meeting 
and organization of the new corporation. 
It expressly provides, also, that the new 
corporation shall have and hold all the 
property of the old; a provision which 
would be quite unnecessary upon any 
other ground, than that the old corpora- 
tion was dissolved. But if it could be 
contended that the effect of these acts 
was not entirely to abolish the old corpo- 
ration, yet it is manifest that they impair 
and invade the rights, property, and 
powers of the trustees under the charter, 
as a corporation, and the legal rights, 
privileges, and immunities which belong 
to them, as individual members of the 
corporation. 

"The twelve trustees were the sole 
legal owners of all the property acquired 
under the charter. By the acts, others 
are admitted, against their will, to be 
joint owners. The twelve individuals 



Effective Public Speech 43 

who are trustees were possessed of all the 
franchises and immunities conferred by 
the charter. By the acts, nine other 
trustees and twenty-five overseers are 
admitted, against their will, to divide these 
franchises and immunities with them. 

"If, either as a corporation or as in- 
dividuals, they have any legal rights, this 
forcible intrusion of others violates those 
rights, as manifestly as an entire and 
complete ouster and dispossession. These 
acts alter the whole constitution of the 
corporation. They affect the rights of the 
whole body as a corporation, and the 
rights of the individuals who compose it. 
They revoke corporate powers and fran- 
chises. They alienate and transfer the 
property of the college to others. By 
the charter, the trustees had a right to 
fill vacancies in their own number. This 
is now taken away. They were to con- 
sist of twelve, and, by express provision, 
of no more. This is altered. They and 
their successors, appointed by themselves, 
were forever to hold the property. The 
legislature has found successors for them, 
before their seats are vacant. The 
powers and privileges which the twelve 
were to exercise exclusively, are now to 
be exercised bv others. Bv one of the 



44 The Structure of an 

acts, they are subjected to heavy penal- 
ties if they exercise their offices, or any of 
those powers and privileges granted 
them by charter, and which they had 
exercised for fifty years. They are to be 
punished for not accepting the new 
grant, and taking its benefits. This, it 
must be confessed, is rather a summary 
mode of settling a question of constitu- 
tional right. Not only are new trustees 
forced into the corporation, but new 
trusts and uses are created. The college 
is turned into a university. Power is 
given to create new colleges, and, to 
authorize any diversion of the funds 
which may be agreeable to the new 
boards, sufficient latitude is given by the 
undefined power of establishing an in- 
stitute. To these new colleges, and this 
institute, the funds contributed by the 
founder, Doctor Wheelock, and by the 
original donors, the Earl of Dartmouth 
and others, are to be applied, in plain and 
manifest disregard of the uses to which 
they were given. 

"The president, one of the old trustees, 
had a right to his office, salary, and 
emoluments, subject to the twelve trus- 
tees alone. His title to these is now 
changed, and he is made accountable to 



Effective Public Speech 45 

new masters. So also all the professors 
and tutors. If the legislature can at 
pleasure make these alterations and 
changes in the rights and privileges of 
the plaintiffs, it may, with equal pro- 
priety, abolish these rights and privileges 
altogether. The same power which can 
do any part of this work can accomplish 
the whole. And, indeed, the argument 
on which these acts have been hitherto 
defended goes altogether on the ground, 
that this is such a corporation as the 
legislature may abolish at pleasure; and 
that its members have no rights, liberties, 
franchises, property, or privileges, which 
the legislature may not revoke, annul, 
alienate, or transfer to others, whenever 
it sees fit. 

"It will be contended by the plaintiffs, 
that these acts are not valid and binding on 
them, without their assent, — 1. Because 
they are against common right, and the 
constitution of New Hampshire. 2. Be- 
cause they are repugnant to the Constitution 
of the United States." 

Macaulay's Address on Education in 
the House of Commons, in 1847, was 
made in the course of a debate and the 



46 The Structure of an 

opening sentences do not immediately 
point to the "bowels" of the address, as 
did Webster's in the Dartmouth College 
case. Webster, likewise, while in the 
Senate, made addresses in the course of 
debate which had introductions less 
concise than that found in his forensic 
masterpiece. Yet look at his great 
"Reply to Hayne" and see how he 
centred attention to his topic by showing, 
in the opening sentences, how far afield 
the previous speakers had gone from the 
subject actually presented for discussion. 
Macaulay's speech on Education, down 
to the proposition, is printed in full 
below. The real introduction is con- 
tained in the two sentences first italicised 
and the proposition is contained in the 
last paragraph of the extract reproduced, 
which is also in italics. 

"You will not wonder, Sir, that I am 
desirous to catch your eye this evening. 
The first duty which I performed, as a 
member of the Committee of Council 
which is charged with the superintendence 



Effective Public Speech 47 

of public instruction, was to give my 
hearty assent to the plan which the 
honourable member for Finbury calls on 
the House to condemn. I am one of 
those who have been accused in every 
part of the Kingdom, and who are now 
accused in Parliament, of aiming, under 
specious pretences, a blow at the civil 
and religious liberties of the people. 
It is natural therefore, that I should 
seize the earliest opportunity of vin- 
dicating myself from so grave a charge. 
44 The honourable member for Finbury 
must excuse me if, in the remarks which 
I have to offer to the House, I should not 
follow very closely the order of his 
speech. The truth is that a mere answer 
to his speech would be no defence of 
myself or of my colleagues. I am sur- 
prised, I own, that a man of his acuteness 
and ability should, on such an occasion, 
have made such a speech. The country is 
excited from one end to the other by a 
great question of principle. On that 
question the government has taken one 
side. The honourable member stands 
forth as the chosen and trusted champion 
of a great party which takes the other 
side. We expected to hear from him a 
full exposition of the views of those in 



48 The Structure of an 

whose name he speaks. But, to our 
astonishment, he has scarcely even alluded 
to the controversy which has divided the 
whole nation. He has entertained us 
with sarcasms and personal anecdotes: 
he has talked much about matters of 
mere detail: but I must say that, after 
listening with close attention to all that 
he has said, I am quite unable to discover 
whether, on the only important point 
which is in issue, he agrees with us or 
with that large and active body of Non- 
conformists which is diametrically op- 
posed to us. He has sate down without 
dropping one word from which it is possi- 
ble to discover whether he thinks that 
education is or that it is not a matter with 
which the state ought to interfere. Yet 
that is the question about which the 
whole nation has, during several weeks, 
been writing, reading, speaking, hearing, 
thinking, petitioning, and on which it is 
now the duty of parliament to pronounce 
a decision. That question once settled, 
there will be, I believe, very little room 
for dispute. // it be not competent to the 
state to interfere with the education of the 
people, the mode of interference recom- 
mended by the Committee of Council must 
of course be condemned. If it be the right 



Effective Public Speech 49 

and the duty of the state to make provision 
for the education of the people, the objections 
made to our plan will, in a very few words, 
be shown to be frivolous. 

"I shall take a course very different from 
that which has been taken by the honourable 
gentleman. I shall in the clearest manner 
profess my opinion on that great question 
of principle which he has studiously evaded; 
and for my opinion I shall give what seem 
to me to be unanswerable reasons. I believe, 
Sir, that it is the right and the duty of the 
state to provide means of education for the 
common people. This proposition seems 
to me to be implied in every definition that 
has ever yet been given of the functions of a 
government. About the extent of those 
functions there has been much difference 
of opinion among ingenious men. There 
are some who hold that it is the business 
of a government to meddle with every 
part of the system of human life, to 
regulate trade by bounties and prohibi- 
tions, to regulate expenditure by sump- 
tuary laws, to regulate literature by a 
censorship, to regulate religion by an 
inquisition. Others go to the opposite 
extreme, and assign to government a very 
narrow sphere of action. But the very 
narrowest sphere that ever was assigned 



50 The Structure of an 

to governments by any school of political 
philosophy is quite wide enough for my 
purpose. On one point all the disputants 
are agreed. They unanimously acknowl- 
edge that it is the duty of every govern- 
ment to take order for giving security to 
the persons and property of the members 
of the community. 

This being admitted, can it be denied 
that the education of the common people 
is a most effectual means of securing our 
persons and our property? Let Adam 
Smith answer that question for me. His 
authority, always high, is, on this sub- 
ject, entitled to peculiar respect, because 
he extremely disliked busy, prying, inter- 
fering governments. He was for leaving 
literature, arts, sciences, to take care of 
themselves. He was not friendly to 
ecclesiastical establishments. He was of 
opinion, that the state ought not to 
meddle with the education of the rich. 
But he has expressly told us that a 
distinction is to be made, particularly in a 
commercial and highly civilised society, 
between the education of the rich and the 
education of the poor. The education of 
the poor, he says, is a matter which 
deeply concerns the commonwealth. Just 
as the magistrate ought to interfere for 



Effective Public Speech 5 1 

the purpose of preventing the leprosy 
from spreading among the people, he 
ought to interfere for the purpose of 
stopping the progress of the moral dis- 
tempers which are inseparable from 
ignorance. Nor can this duty be neg- 
lected without danger to the public peace. 
If you leave the multitude uninstructed, 
there is serious risk that religious animos- 
ities may produce the most dreadful 
disorders. The most dreadful disorders! 
Those are Adam Smith's own words; and 
prophetic words they were. Scarcely 
had he given this warning to our rulers 
when his prediction was fulfilled in a 
manner never to be forgotten. I speak 
of the No Popery riots of 1780. I do not 
know that I could find in all history a 
stronger proof of the proposition, that 
the ignorance of the common people 
makes the property, the limbs, the lives 
of all classes insecure. Without the 
shadow of a grievance, at the summons of 
a madman, a hundred thousand people 
rise in insurrection. During a whole 
week, there is anarchy in the greatest and 
wealthiest of European cities. The 
Parliament is besieged. Your predecessor 
sits trembling in his chair, and expects 
every moment to see the door beaten in 



5£ The Structure of an 

by the ruffians whose roar he hears all 
around the house. The peers are pulled 
out of their coaches. The bishops in 
their lawn are forced to fly over the 
tiles. The chapels of foreign ambas- 
sadors, buildings made sacred by the law 
of nations, are destroyed. The house of 
the Chief Justice is demolished. The 
little children of the Prime Minister are 
taken out of their beds and laid in their 
night clothes on the table of the Horse 
Guards, the only safe asylum from the 
fury of the rabble. The prisons are 
opened. Highwaymen, housebreakers, 
murderers, come forth to swell the mob 
by which they have been set free. Thirty- 
six fires are blazing at once in London. 
Then comes the retribution. Count up 
all the wretches who were shot, who were 
hanged, who were crushed, who drank 
themselves to death at the rivers of gin 
which ran down Holborn Hill ; and you 
will find that battles have been lost and 
won with a smaller sacrifice of life. And 
what was the cause of this calamity, a 
calamity which, in the history of London, 
ranks with the great plague and the 
great fire? The cause was the ignorance 
of a population which has been suffered, 
in the neighbourhood of palaces, theatres, 



Effective Public Speech 53 

temples, to grow up as rude and stupid 
as any tribe of tattooed cannibals in 
New Zealand, I might say as any drove of 
beasts in Smithfield Market. 

"The instance is striking: but it is not 
solitary. To the same cause are to be 
ascribed the riots of Nottingham, the 
sack of Bristol, all the outrages of Ludd, 
and Swing, and Rebecca, beautiful and 
costly machinery broken to pieces in 
Yorkshire, barns and haystacks blazing 
in Kent, fences and buildings pulled down 
in Wales. Could such things have been 
done in a country in which the mind of 
the labourer had been opened by educa- 
tion, in which he had been taught to find 
pleasure in the exercise of his intellect, 
taught to revere his Maker, taught to 
respect legitimate authority, and taught 
at the same time to seek the redress of 
real wrongs by peaceful and constitu- 
tional means? 

"This then is my argument. It is the 
duty of government to protect our persons 
and property from danger. The gross 
ignorance of the common people is a prin- 
cipal cause of danger to our persons and 
property. Therefore, it is the duty of the 
government to take care that the common 
people shall not be grossly ignorant." 



54 The Structure of an 

One of the reasons for selecting the 
two speeches from which the foregoing 
extracts have been taken for examples 
here is that they illustrate the two prin- 
cipal forms of propositions most often 
used. Webster employed the division of 
the subject and Macaulay used the 
syllogism, as pointed out more at length 
in the next chapter. 



Effective Public Speech 55 



PROPOSITION 

While the introduction proper indicates 
the side of the question the speaker 
favors, and the general features of the 
entire subject, the proposition states 
more particularly the precise point which 
the speaker intends to prove. This may 
be done by a division of the subject, 
containing simple assertions, which was 
the method followed by Webster in the 
Dartmouth College forensic; or it may be 
in the form of a syllogism, which was the 
method employed by Macaulay, in the 
oration on Education. Sometimes these 
forms are combined. That is, one or 
more of the assertions in the division, may 
be stated subsequently in the form of a 
syllogism or of syllogisms. 

The simple division needs no explana- 
tion. In Webster's great speech before 
the United States Supreme Court, in the 



56 The Structure of an 

Dartmouth College case, he followed 
strictly the classical division herein dis- 
cussed. His introduction was brief and 
pointed. It is discussed in Chapter III. 
His narrative or statement of facts was 
clear, concise and interesting. Then 
before entering upon the argument proper 
he said: 

"It will be contended by the plaintiffs 
that these acts (of the Legislature) are 
not valid and binding on them without 
their assent, — 

"1. Because they are against common 
right, and the Constitution of New 
Hampshire. 

"&. Because they are repugnant to the 
Constitution of the United States." 

The Justices of the Supreme Court 
thus had presented to them clearly and 
concisely the points which were to be 
argued by Mr. Webster. 

The syllogism, perhaps, may not be so 
well understood, especially by younger 
speakers. It is hardly necessary to say 
that this form of stating a proposition 



Effective Public Speech 57 

has been used since time immemorial and 
is still considered the most forcible way 
in which an argument can be made. It is 
simply a statement of two propositions 
or "premises" from which the third or 
" conclusion" inevitably follows, if both 
the premises are accepted, or are con- 
clusively proved. Thus take the follow- 
ing simple syllogism: 

All roads in Italy lead to Rome ; 

This is a road in Italy; 

Therefore this road leads to Rome. 

Or take another : 

All planets revolve around the sun; 
The earth is a planet ; 
Therefore the earth revolves around the 
sun. 

The important points in the skilful 
use of the syllogism are, first, that the 
conclusion must inevitably follow the 
premises; and second, one premise, at 
least, should be such that the audience 
will accept its truthfulness and accuracy, 



58 The Structure of an 

unquestionably. Thus the whole weight 
of the speaker's effort is employed to 
prove one premise. This clarifies the 
subject, holds the attention of the 
audience and if the speaker succeeds in 
establishing that one premise, to the 
satisfaction of his hearers, he has won his 
case. 

Note how successfully Macaulay for- 
mulated his syllogism under the rules 
just suggested. His first premise was: 

"It is the duty of the government to 
protect our persons and property from 
danger." 

No one could dispute that proposition. 

His second premise was: 

"The gross ignorance of the common 
people is a principal cause of danger to 
our persons and property.'' 

If this latter proposition is accepted, or 
conclusively proved, the conclusion in- 
evitably follows that : 

"It is the duty of the government to 
take care that the common people shall 
not be grossly ignorant." 



Effective Public Speech 59 

Macaulay, therefore, quite property 
proceeded to prove his minor premise. 
In order that the student may observe 
how well this task was performed, the 
entire argument following the proposi- 
tion should be read. 1 Moreover, the 
same speech is instructive as an indication 
of the state of public education in Great 
Britain so short a time ago, compara- 
tively, as 1847. 

Great care should be taken that the 
syllogism is logically correct. If there is a 
defect in this respect the whole argument 
may fall to the ground and failure will 
follow, even though the speaker has the 
side of the question which ought to be 
sustained. While logic has nothing to 
do with the truth or falsity of the state- 
ments of facts, it has very much to do 
with the conclusion which is drawn 
therefrom. For example, logic is not 
concerned about the truth of the state- 



1 It may be found in " Speeches on Politics and 
Literature/ ' Everyman's Library, p. 349, published 
by E. P. Dutton and Co. 



60 The Structure of an 

ment that, "All planets revolve around 
the sun." This is a statement of fact 
which may or may not be true, but is 
assumed to be true for the purpose of 
applying the rules of logic to the syl- 
logism. The same may be said of the 
minor premise that, "The earth is a 
planet." This may or may not be true, 
so far as logic is concerned. But if both 
of these premises are true then the 
logical conclusion inevitably follows that : 
"The earth revolves around the sun." 

The same may be said of the other 
syllogism. The statement that "All 
roads in Italy lead to Rome" cannot be 
tested by logic. Nor can the minor 
premise that "This is a road in Italy." 
But if both of these premises are true, 
then, by the rules of logic, the conclusion 
is inevitably true that "This road leads 
to Rome." 

But in the case of a less simple syllogism 
it might be easy to fall into a logical 
error. The practice of great care in this 
respect, in regard to the speaker's own 



Effective Public Speech 61 

proposition, will help him to discover 
fallacies in those of his opponent. This is 
not always an easy matter. Or, rather, 
it is sometimes easy to discover the fal- 
lacies, but it is not so easy to demon- 
strate to an audience that they are fal- 
lacies. Suppose, for example, we should 
take either of the two simple syllogisms 
stated above and convert it into a 
fallacy, as follows : 

All roads in Italy lead to Rome. 

This road leads to Rome. 

Therefore this is a road in Italy. 

The above syllogism is baldly fallaci- 
ous. You understand it perfectly almost 
as soon as you read it. Suppose we treat 
the other example in like manner, as 
follows : 

All planets revolve around the sun. 

The earth revolves around the sun. 

Therefore the earth is a planet. 

This is equally fallacious and the 
reader appreciates the fallacy as soon as 
he examines it. But to appreciate the 
difficulty of clearly explaining to an 



62 The Structure of an 

audience the fallacy in an opponent's 
reasoning, let the student thus try to 
explain, to an imaginary audience, the 
fallacy in either one of the foregoing 
examples, on the spur of the moment. 

As a matter of fact the fallacy is often 
either ingeniously, or carelessly, or ig- 
norantly concealed in persuasive state- 
ments, which seem reasonable and plau- 
sible. 

The syllogism is rarely stated as plainly 
and baldly as are the examples given. It 
is more often stated in what may be 
called an oratorical form. Thus one 
element of the syllogism may be omitted 
entirely, in the actual speech, as made. 
The major premise may be so well under- 
stood as to require no statement at all. 
In such a case it is merely necessary to 
state the minor premise and perhaps the 
conclusion. Thus, also, in many argu- 
ments, if the major premise is clearly 
understood and assented to by the 
audience, it may be that the statement 
and proof of the minor premise alone may 



Effective Public Speech 63 

show the conclusion so clearly and 
inevitably that it is better to allow the 
audience to draw the conclusion than to 
state it. Such a practice, however, is 
fraught with danger. The speaker having 
studied the subject thoroughly some- 
times takes it for granted that the 
audience understand it better than they 
really do. Usually it is safer to state all 
three elements of the proposition, than 
to leave even one to the imagination of 
the audience, if there is any possible 
chance that a considerable number of 
those in the audience will not understand 
it. 



64 The Structure of an 



VI 



ARGUMENT AND PROOF 

This is the place where the really 
heavy guns of the orator are brought into 
play. He has shown to the audience the 
facts which call for action and he has 
proposed the action which he advocates. 
Now he must justify his proposition. 
He must prove any facts as to which 
there is a doubt or a dispute. He must 
appeal to reason and possibly to passion. 
He must allay the feeling of fear, per- 
haps, which has been aroused by his 
opponent. This is the place where he 
must pile up his proof and arguments, 
tier on tier. For the purpose of getting 
the matter clearly in mind and making 
the argument comprehensive a brief 
may be made of the principal and subor- 
dinate points. This is a valuable aid to a 
classification of the material for the 
argument and proof. It is also an aid 



Effective Public Speech 65 

to the memory in the delivery of the 
speech. A number of minor points may be 
proved by what might be termed auxiliary 
syllogisms. The opinions of others who 
are recognized authorities on the subject 
may be quoted. Reference may be made 
to authentic historical incidents. In fact 
the whole field of argumentation may be 
searched and its principles applied in this 
subdivision of the speech. 

A novel thought or unexpected ar- 
rangement of words, so long as they 
are relevant, often reaches the hearers 
more forcibly than a plain statement 
would have done. Thus the figure known 
as the rhetorical paradox is sometimes 
extremely effective. Of this kind is the 
saying that "A man who never makes 
mistakes never makes anything else." 

Or the following : 

"His Honor rooted in dishonor stood 
and faith, unfaithful, kept him falsely 
true." 

But be careful of too great refinement 
or of phrases the meaning of which is not 



66 The Structure of an 

reasonably clear. For example, logicians 
have argued that the maxim : 

"There is an exception to every rule," 
disproves itself. For if there is an excep- 
tion to every rule there is an exception to 
this rule; and therefore there is one rule 
without an exception. 

Such arguments carry little weight 
with the average audience in these 
matter-of-fact days. 

One extremely effective mode of argu- 
ment is to build up a pyramidal climax, 
or series of climaxes, of solid facts. If 
they are facts, are pertinent to the ques- 
tion under discussion and are properly 
arranged and enumerated by the speaker 
in a forceful and animated manner, he 
can scarcely fail to win the approval of 
his audience. Such a plan greatly excels 
any wordy climax, however eloquent, 
from a purely rhetorical point of view, of 
irrelevant words, sentences and ideas. 

Thus take the liquor question, which 
probably lends itself to this treatment as 
well as any which could be discussed. 



Effective Public Speech 67 

Start with a broad foundation, which will 
support everything which follows : 

The use of intoxicating liquors as a 
beverage is the greatest scourge known 
to mankind. 

It is excessively expensive, extremely 
injurious to health, thus greatly shorten- 
ing the lives of even moderate drinkers; 
it dulls the brain and thus decreases 
efficiency; it lowers the whole moral 
tone, causes untold poverty and misery 
and is responsible for most of the crime 
and insanity which are a reproach to a 
civilized community. 

I said it was excessively expensive. In 
the United States alone the enormous 
sum of $1,700,000,000 is spent annually 
for intoxicating liquors. The Panama 
Canal cost $400,000,000, but the pay- 
ments covered a period of more than ten 
years. With the sum spent for intox- 
icating liquors we could build four 
Panama Canals each year for ten years, or 
forty in all, and then have a billion dollars 
left over as a nest egg with which they 



68 The Structure of an 

could be operated. People complain of 
the $250,000,000 spent annually by the 
United States on the Army and Navy, 
including new battleships. With the 
amount spent for intoxicating liquors 
we could have seven armies and navies 
of equal size. 

I said it was injurious to health. The 
life insurance statistics show that non- 
drinkers live on the average from twenty- 
five to thirty-three per cent longer than 
moderate drinkers. The mortality among 
heavy drinkers is enormous. Recent 
figures compiled from the experience 
of forty-two of the large life insurance 
companies covering the last twenty-five 
years show that should Russia continue 
to enforce the recent ordinance against 
the use of intoxicating liquors a loss of 
500,000 men in the present (1914) war 
would be actually made up in ten years 
by the greater longevity of the remainder 
of the male population. It has been 
stated in the British Parliament recently, 
that the efficiencv of the Russians, as a 



Effective Public Speech 69 

nation, had been increased from thirty 
to fifty per cent, by the total abstinence 
decree. In fact, alcohol burns the lining 
of the stomach, injures the liver, de- 
stroys the kidneys, irritates the intestines 
and bladder, hardens the veins and ar- 
teries, weakens the heart and makes 
flabby the muscles generally. 

I said it dulls the brain. We have all 
witnessed or perhaps some of us have 
experienced this effect. Targets were re- 
cently distributed among the soldiers of 
some of the European armies showing 
what poor shots were invariably made by 
men after partaking of even small 
amounts of liquor although the same 
men were crack shots when free from 
intoxicants, and had previously been in 
the habit of drinking moderately. Elab- 
orate tests have been made in other places 
with hundreds of men, setting type and 
typewriting. Men who were in the habit 
of taking a moderate amount of intox- 
icants were given the same amount and 
their work compared as to accuracy and 



70 The Structure of an 

quantity with their efforts when entirely 
free from intoxicants. Non-drinkers and 
immoderate drinkers were tested in the 
same way in a long series of experiments. 
In practically every instance the men 
after drinking imagined they were doing 
better and more work and in every in- 
stance they did poorer and less work than 
when free from liquor entirely. 

We not infrequently hear it said that a 
man could not possibly have committed 
some atrocious crime with which he is 
charged unless he had been drunk. In 
fact, the lowering of the moral tone from 
drink is so well known as to need no 
citation of specific instances. 

All authorities who have made any 
study of the subject agree that crime and 
insanity are due very largely to the direct 
and indirect effects of drinking intox- 
icating liquors. In Kansas where they 
have for a number of years actually had a 
prohibition law which really prohibits 
drink crime and insanity have decreased 
to an enormous extent. 



Effective Public Speech 71 

No man, woman or child was ever 
injured to the slightest extent by total 
abstinence from intoxicating liquor, while 
for its use billions of wealth have been 
wasted, and untold misery, suffering 
and deaths have been caused. Con- 
sidered from an industrial point of view 
alone, in the fact that billions upon 
billions have been paid to workmen for 
the manufacture of the liquor itself and 
the bottles, corks, casks and hundreds of 
other accessories used in the traffic, 
together with the establishments where it 
is dispensed, this, in a way, is all wasted, 
because it does not tend to the final 
betterment of the race, nor to any general 
progress, but in the other direction. 
Nations progress in spite of intoxicating 
liquor, not because of any industrial or 
other benefits flowing from its use. 



7% The Structure of an 

VII 

REFUTATION 

While refutation is an element in the 
great majority of serious speeches, it is 
not always present. In legal arguments, 
before either court or jury, refutation 
plays an important part. It is frequently 
more difficult to prove a negative than 
it is a positive. Thus when a witness has 
testified to a certain set of facts he has 
produced a picture in the minds of the 
jurors. Even though the testimony of 
this witness is false in every essential 
particular nevertheless he has created a 
mental picture, which must be obliterated 
by negative testimony. It is difficult to 
wipe out every trace of this falsehood. 

Take an ordinary negligence action, for 
example. A witness for the plaintiff 
testifies that he saw the plaintiff getting 
off a trolley car and just as he had one 
foot on the ground the car was pre- 



Effective Public Speech 73 

maturely started and the plaintiff was 
thrown to the ground. This testimony 
creates a picture in the minds of the 
jurors, because the story is easily under- 
standable by them. Suppose it is not 
true and the defendant's counsel is cer- 
tain it is not true. He refutes it in many 
ways by testimony of other witnesses who 
were present when the alleged injury 
occurred. He produces others who swear 
that the plaintiff's witness was in another 
place at the time of the accident. On 
cross examination, possibly, he catches 
the witness in contradictory statements. 
But in the end the case stands that there 
is a direct conflict of testimony on the one 
important point on which it probably will 
turn. This is the place where the skilful 
use of refutation, in summing up the 
evidence, will be of great assistance. 
In a desperate case, such as suggested, it 
calls for the best there is in the speaker. 
All departments of oratory may be called 
into play, not infrequently without suc- 
cess. 



74 The Structure of an 

Sometimes the refutation is mingled 
with the general argument. Often it is 
placed earlier in the speech. There is no 
hard and fast rule which can be applied 
invariably on this subject. It is the one 
part of a speech, perhaps, with which 
more liberty can be taken than any other, 
so far as its chronological order is con- 
cerned. 

There may be no direct refutation at 
all. Instead of attempting to tear dow T n 
his opponent's structure the speaker may 
think it more advantageous to build an 
argumentative structure which over- 
towers* that of his opponent. Thus he 
may concede many of his opponent's 
assertions, but show that there are other 
considerations vastly more important. 
For example, in a discussion of the old, 
but always important, question of the 
tariff on goods imported from foreign 
countries, suppose you are arguing in 
favor of a protective tariff and your 
opponent has declared for substantial 
free trade, or a greatly reduced tariff. 



Effective Public Speech 75 

Doubtless one of the arguments will be 
that a low tariff will decrease the cost of 
living, because many manufactured ar- 
ticles, which are used in large quantities, 
can be purchased in European markets 
cheaper than they can be secured in 
America. You may readily concede this 
point. But the real question is the 
relative cost of living. The very minute 
we begin to bring articles from other 
countries we must be able to produce the 
same article at home for a price as low 
as that for which it can be brought here 
from abroad. Otherwise our own manu- 
facturers must go out of business. That 
is a mere truism. Roughly speaking, the 
cost of producing a manufactured article 
is divided into two parts, namely, the 
cost of the raw material and the labor 
expense. If the market for the raw 
material is open to the buyers of the 
world, on approximately equal terms, the 
manufacturer who can secure the cheap- 
est labor controls the market, under 
ordinary circumstances. We know per- 



76 The Structure of an 

fectly well that the wage scale in most of 
the countries with which we compete in 
relation to manufactures, is from thirty 
to fifty per centum only of that prevailing 
in the United States. In producing an 
article requiring the use of raw material 
which may be purchased on approx- 
imately equal terms by the manufac- 
turers of the world, therefore, American 
labor must be contented with approx- 
imately the same wages that are paid in 
countries with which our manufacturers 
compete, otherwise our manufacturers 
must go out of business. This also is a 
mere truism. The cost of articles of 
competitive manufacture, under the cir- 
cumstances narrated, therefore, cannot 
be reduced without also decreasing the 
wages of labor employed in those indus- 
tries. The real question is, therefore, 
whether the readjustment, which is 
inevitable with a law tariff, will leave the 
relative cost of living higher or lower than 
it was before the tariff reduction. Our 
industrial system has been built up on a 



Effective Public Speech 77 

protective tariff basis. The lowered 
tariff will affect different industries in 
various degrees. During the readjust- 
ment period labor in the industries which 
are affected the most will have a serious 
struggle. This is inevitable. Strikes and 
lockouts will probably result. The great 
European War has postponed the indus- 
trial struggle in this country, by making 
competition almost impossible on the 
part of some at least of our keenest 
competitors. The enormously increased 
imports before the war started fore- 
shadow the conditions which will prevail 
when peace is established. Unless the 
readjustment has already been accom- 
plished when peace is declared, an 
industrial conflict is sure to follow in 
America. Just what form that conflict 
will take no man can safely predict. 
Nor can any man say whether or not, in 
the end, the relative cost of living will be 
higher or lower in America when the 
protective basis on which our industrial 
system has been established is destroyed. 



78 The Structure of an 

The truth of it is we are making a tremen- 
dously important change without know- 
ing how we shall come out eventually. 
While the change is being accomplished 
much suffering must inevitably result 
from the confusion and uncertainty with 
which it will be attended. 

The foregoing, of course, is only a small 
portion of the argument pro and con, on 
the tariff question. It is given merely as 
an example of refutation by overshadow- 
ing arguments. All persons would not 
be willing to concede that a lowered 
tariff would reduce the cost of living at 
all and they might possibly support that 
view by direct refutation. What has 
been said is merely an example of ar- 
gumentation, not an expression of views, 
which would be entirely out of place in a 
book of this character. 



Effective Public Speech 79 



VIII 

CONCLUSION OR PERORATION 

The experienced general sends forward 
his best and bravest troops to make the 
final charge, so his army may be vic- 
torious, after the long preceding struggle. 
The siege howitzers have boomed, shrap- 
nel has burst, machine guns have played 
with deadly effect on the enemy, but 
whether the result at last shall be a 
victory or a defeat depends on the final 
onslaught. Thus, also, it is with an 
orator. After he has introduced his 
subject, narrated his facts, stated and 
proved his proposition and refuted his 
opponent's arguments, he comes to the 
final appeal by which he seeks to inspire 
action. It is like the brilliant charge in 
which the soldiers seem to throw discre- 
tion to the winds and, in their irresistible 
onrush, to carry everything before them. 
Like the soldier the speaker is engaged in 



80 The Structure of an 

no dress parade affair, nor does this por- 
tion of his speech admit of any excursive 
digressions. As the soldiers must usually 
charge directly in the face of the enemy, 
so must the speaker make a frontal at- 
tack on the question under discussion. 
Fine phrases and other verbal embellish- 
ments are all very well, but unless they 
are strictly relevant and material to the 
object of the address they are worse than 
useless. If they are of such a character 
as to take the mind of the audience away 
from the subject under discussion they 
tend to turn into a defeat what otherwise 
might have been a successful endeavor. 
The speaker may use as many fine 
phrases as he pleases so long as they are 
clear, forceful and relevant. If they 
lack any one of these characteristics 
they should be discarded ruthlessly. 
When Patrick Henry, in his courageous 
and patriotic address before the House 
of Burgesses, in the speech which caused 
so much consternation, declared: "I 
know not what course others may take; 



Effective Public Speech 81 

but as for me, give me liberty or give 
me death!" every word had a weighty 
meaning. These phrases have become so 
well known, from constant repetition, 
that they are not infrequently used with a 
meaning which is anything but serious. 
But they would not have lived at all if 
they had not had a serious meaning when 
they were uttered. In sober truth, 
liberty for the American Colonist, or 
death for the ringleaders of the Revolu- 
tion, were the only alternatives. Of this 
fact those who heard Patrick Henry were 
perfectly well aware. That was why his 
words made such a deep impression. 
They were the very soul of his oration. 
That is why they have lived until to-day 
and have become so common and trite 
by constant repetition. 

Note the weight and pertinency of the 
closing words of Webster's peroration in 
the "Reply to Hayne" — not liberty first 
and union afterwards, but, "Liberty and 
union, now and forever, one and in- 
eparable!" The whole of Webster's 



82 The Structure of an 

patriotic appeal was contained in these 
last words. They were weighty because 
they were pertinent. Webster was en- 
deavoring to prevent threatened secession 
on the part of some of the States, and his 
whole endeavor was to prevent a breaking 
up of the Union, and yet retain that 
liberty which the Union had secured for 
the people of the new Nation. 

Think of Lincoln's wonderful appeals 
in the Gettysburg Speech and the Second 
Inaugural Address. His words were 
effective principally because they were 
peculiarly pertinent to the matter under 
discussion. At Gettysburg he declared 
that this new Nation " conceived in 
liberty and dedicated to the proposition 
that all men are created equal/' was on 
trial. The w^orld was waiting to see 
whether or not a nation "so conceived 
and so dedicated" could long endure. 
Then he made that wonderful final 
appeal, that from the honored dead who 
had fallen on that terrible battlefield his 
countrvmen should take increased devo- 



Effective Public Speech 83 

tion to the cause represented by the 
declaration that a "government of the 
people, by the people and for the people 
shall not perish from the earth." 

So the final words of the Second Inau- 
gural Address show not only a noble 
spirit but they also were keenly pertinent 
to the matter in hand : 

"With nialice toward none; with 
charity for all; with firmness in the right, 
as God gives us to see the right, — let us 
strive on to finish the work we are in: 
to bind up the nation's wounds; to care 
for him who shall have borne the battle, 
and for his widow and his orphan; to do 
all which may achieve and cherish a just 
and lasting peace among ourselves, and 
with all nations." 



84 The Structure of an 



IX 

ADDENDUM 

Stick to your subject. Do not tell a 
good story merely because it is a good 
story, but only when it illustrates, or in 
some way enforces, a point which you 
desire to make. An audience will forgive 
the absence of humor much more quickly 
than it will digressions which confuse the 
principal theme under discussion. If you 
happen to know humorous anecdotes, 
which vividly illustrate your points, use 
them by all means, to a limited extent, 
but do not drag them in by the heels. 
The delivery of a string of funny stories, 
which have no significance except that 
they are funny stories, will gain very 
little permanent or valuable reputation 
for anyone, except vaudeville actors, or 
other professional humorists, and it is 
scarcely necessary to say that this book 
is not for them. Such a practice, which is 



Effective Public Speech 85 

indulged in by some so-called after- 
dinner speakers, has not won for them 
much valuable glory or reputation. Mark 
Twain was an ideal after-dinner speaker, 
but he stuck to his text almost invariably 
and his wit and humor were incidental 
to a more or less serious theme. Besides, 
Mark Twain was a professional humorist. 

Never forget that an address must be 
interesting at all times. 

Never overstate your own case, nor 
depend on the supposed weakness of your 
opponent or his case. 

Seek the truth always. 

Don't imagine you are clever because 
you can argue on either side of a specific 
question. There is one side on which you 
cannot argue effectively, because you 
do not believe it. It is better not to argue 
at all than in favor of some proposition as 
to which, in your private heart, you do 
not subscribe; the advice of several 
respectable authorities to the contrary 
not wi ths tandi ng . 



2187 9 7 




V 








o > 













<S> 6 o««, 



.*" .' 



**> refill- ^* •&MM4 * ^*v 
5^ o%?^w» A v\ -^a^« .<5^ n 











LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 



027 249 429 0, 






■.■■■■■■:.•■■•■■• 




.^c®!!! 

» : iiil 







WKMm 

gHHR 



SimS 



K«6«!« 



BBfHW 
HHRi 



